I don't take any conclusions of that type from the article, eastbloc. Which part makes you think that the victim is giving a pass to people whose neighborhood to defend what is left of pre-gentrified area by committing more assaults/muggings?

I honestly don't even detect any element of the writer feeling like an "evil gentrifier".. did we even read the same article?

I honestly don't even detect any element of the writer feeling like an "evil gentrifier".. did we even read the same article?

The writer's words: "I had landed in a community about which I knew nothing. Rather, I knew I was the gentrifier — that much was obvious — but I hadn’t known what that meant. Whatever I did know or had done reeked of paternalism; it fell into a pattern of assumptions that outsiders bring with them when they think they will “form community” in an already existing community."

ETA: I suspect that the title of the article "On Being Both the Wolf and the Lamb" is a clue.

I wonder whether her being subject to unwanted groping on the street is a reflection on the neighborhood itself or a manifestation of the perils of city living.

Hmm, fair enough. She recognizes that others perceive her as an evil gentrifier/wolf. I don't believe that she thinks that her gentrifier role entitles others to try to drive her away by forcing themselves on her.

Sure, living in the city can open up the opportunity for unwanted attention, provide a level of anonymity and can also mean that police can't take a particularly active role in investigating (since they have to triage against murders, felony assaults, hit and runs) but you don't think that Nostrand Ave/Crown Heights was a major factor? A potential groper wouldn't try to pull that type of thing in lots of neighborhoods in the city and would be much less likely to try in other areas.

but you don't think that Nostrand Ave/Crown Heights was a major factor? A potential groper wouldn't try to pull that type of thing in lots of neighborhoods in the city and would be much less likely to try in other areas.

I honestly don't know.

Full disclosure - I was the victim of a similar incident years ago when I was a young teenager. This incident happened in 1989 a few blocks from my house, near the Crown Heights/PLG border. I didn't report it because I had no idea what to do or how to deal with it.

I suspect that maybe, yes, this type of thing may be more likely to happen in certain neighborhoods than in others. This brings to mind I a discussion on city-data.com initiated by a professional woman who was victimized several times by street hasassment (once it had turned physical); she was frustrated and she was looking for suggestions on how to reduce the likelihood of such incidents from happening. The discussion was so frustrating it wasn't really constructive. Several people of course mentioned race, which turned out to be a minefield. Others didn't seem to take the woman's sense of victimization seriously. Some people said basically, "What did you expect by moving to such a neighborhood?" and, "Move!"

I hate to see the same sort of comments come up in the conversation regarding this woman's experiences. I'm curious to hear a rational hypothesis for what motivates a groper or street harasser and why he tends to commits such actions in certain areas and not in others.

Full disclosure: I didn't particularly like the original article either, but it pertained to Crown Heights and I thought it might make for some interesting fodder for debate. I was also curious whether others had the same response I did, or if my own status as a "gentrifier" (as if one moves to a neighborhood with the intent of gentrifying), albeit one who's lived here for over a decade now, was behind my initial dislike of the article (I kept thinking "we're really not all like that.").

mcpoet said:Full disclosure: I didn't particularly like the original article either, but it pertained to Crown Heights and I thought it might make for some interesting fodder for debate. I was also curious whether others had the same response I did, or if my own status as a "gentrifier" (as if one moves to a neighborhood with the intent of gentrifying), albeit one who's lived here for over a decade now, was behind my initial dislike of the article (I kept thinking "we're really not all like that.").

The article may have fallen under the "Crown Heights" header because the incident happened in Crown Heights. The impression I got from the article is that this incident happened because the writer had made the mistake of moving to Crown Heights (a neighborhood that is sooo dangerous, oh, no!) Plus, the fact that the writer and her assaulter were of difference races was mentioned. That sets up the potential for discussion of the article to become skewed and devolve very quickly.

Full disclosure, I disliked the article right away and I grew up in the neighborhood.

A responsible action may have been including a narrative from a native resident who was a victim of a similar crime for balance. Then, the tone becomes less of "gentrifiers vs. natives" while keeping the focus where it should be: being subject to being groped on the street is wrong.

Despite the fact that it also rubbed me the wrong way, I think the writer hits on two things that ring true.

The first is that she (and a lot of people) moved here without knowing much about the neighborhood. In her case, she was unaware of the level of crime -- though I don't think what happened to her had anything to do with how safe or unsafe Crown Heights is, and I don't think CH is unsafe. But I constantly hear newcomers being surprised by things that are either easily researched or visibly obvious to anyone who's spent five minutes here and I want to ask "Didn't you ever come here before you moved here?"

The second is that it never occurred to her that she might be targeted because she's seen as a gentrifier -- though I don't think what happened to her had anything to do with that either. But it would be naive of me to say that newcomers aren't targeted by some existing criminal elements (I think they certainly are for robberies and muggings) and I've also been told by some of my new neighbors about being harassed on the street specifically on the basis of their whiteness or newness. It's rare but it does happen.

That said, what's so troubling -- as both the response article and whynot point out -- is the implication that a sexual assault that happened to happen here is a consequence of, or to be expected from, living here and the assumption that the neighborhood tolerates it. I don't think location had much to do with it; in my experience verbal street harassment and the tolerance of it are more common in certain neighborhoods, yes, but the gropers, flashers, masturbaters, etc. haven't been confined to any particular 'hood and nothing in the culture of the Crown Heights I know excuses sexual assault no matter who the victim is.

I agree with what most of the posters say here like Whynot and nothinlikeabklyngirl.

I have lived in Brooklyn my whole life. I have been verbally harassed numerous times. I have been groped twice. Once on a crowded subway and another time in the Boro Park neighborhood, whose crime rate is extremely low. I handled it much differently than the author, but I have never had any type of "physical" sexual harassment in this neighborhood.

]That said, what's so troubling -- as both the response article and whynot point out -- is the implication that a sexual assault that happened to happen here is a consequence of, or to be expected from, living here and the assumption that the neighborhood tolerates it. I don't think location had much to do with it; in my experience verbal street harassment and the tolerance of it are more common in certain neighborhoods, yes, but the gropers, flashers, masturbaters, etc. haven't been confined to any particular 'hood and nothing in the culture of the Crown Heights I know excuses sexual assault no matter who the victim is.

My experience is that the largest percentage of sexual assaults of the type she experienced happen in the subways, mostly near stops that are very crowded like Union Square, Times Square, 59th Street, etc. It's interesting to me that several years ago when women were routinely being assaulted and raped in the Park Slope/Greenwood Heights/ Sunset Park area it wasn't an indictment of the neighborhood or the people that lived there. The other thing that's interesting was that she described her attacker as being Latino, in a neighborhood that has a small to non-existant Latino population, and yet this crime is somehow reflective of all of the people that she comes into contact with in the neighborhood who are not Latino and who have not accosted, attacked or harassed her.

What's the biggest myth about street harassment? That men of color comprise the majority of offenders. It's a myth as old as this nation: the idea that Black men are more likely to be sexual predators -- especially of white women....